Dataset Information

Association between chronic hepatitis B infection and COVID-19 outcomes: A Korean nationwide cohort study.

ABSTRACT:

Background/aims

We measured the association between underlying chronic hepatitis B (CHB) and antiviral use with infection rates among patients who underwent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing.

Methods

In total, 204,418 patients who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 between January and June 2020 were included. For each case patient (n = 7,723) with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, random controls (n = 46,231) were selected from the target population who had been exposed to someone with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) but had a negative SARS-CoV-2 test result. We merged claim-based data from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database collected. Primary endpoints were SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe clinical outcomes of COVID-19.

Results

The proportion of underlying CHB was lower in COVID-19 positive patients (n = 267, 3.5%) than in COVID-19 negative controls (n = 2482, 5.4%). Underlying CHB was associated with a lower SARS-CoV-2 positivity rate, after adjusting for comorbidities (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.74). Among patients with confirmed COVID-19, underlying CHB tended to confer a 66% greater risk of severe clinical outcomes of COVID-19, although this value was statistically insignificant. Antiviral treatment including tenofovir and entecavir was associated with a reduced SARS-CoV-2 positivity rate (aOR 0.49; 95% CI, 0.37-0.66), while treatment was not associated with severe clinical outcomes of COVID-19.

Conclusions

Underlying CHB and antiviral agents including tenofovir decreased susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection. HBV coinfection did not increase the risk of disease severity or lead to a worse prognosis in COVID-19.

SUBMITTER: Kang SH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8491877 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Evidence for the association between underlying non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), the risk of testing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) positive, and the clinical consequences of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is controversial and scarce. We aimed to investigate the association between the presence of NAFLD and the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infectivity and COVID-19-related outcomes. Methods We used the population-based, nationwide cohort in South Korea linked with the general health examination records between January 1, 2018 and July 30, 2020. Data for 212,768 adults older than 20 years who underwent SARS-CoV-2 testing from January 1 to May 30, 2020, were obtained. The presence of NAFLDs was defined using three definitions, namely hepatic steatosis index (HSI), fatty liver index (FLI), and claims-based definition. The outcomes were SARS-CoV-2 test positive, COVID-19 severe illness, and related death. Results Among 74,244 adults who completed the general health examination, there were 2,251 (3.0%) who were SARS-CoV-2 positive, 438 (0.6%) with severe COVID-19 illness, and 45 (0.06%) COVID-19-related deaths. After exposure-driven propensity score matching, patients with pre-existing HSI-NAFLD, FLI-NAFLD, or claims-based NAFLD had an 11–23% increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (HSI-NAFLD 95% confidence interval [CI], 1–28%; FLI-NAFLD 95% CI, 2–27%; and claims-based NAFLD 95% CI, 2–31%) and a 35–41% increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness (HSI-NAFLD 95% CI, 8–83%; FLI-NAFLD 95% CI, 5–71%; and claims-based NAFLD 95% CI, 1–92%). These associations are more evident as liver fibrosis advanced (based on the BARD scoring system). Similar patterns were observed in several sensitivity analyses including the full-unmatched cohort. Conclusion Patients with pre-existing NAFLDs have a higher likelihood of testing SARS-CoV-2 positive and severe COVID-19 illness; this association was more evident in patients with NAFLD with advanced fibrosis. Our results suggest that extra attention should be given to the management of patients with NAFLD during the COVID-19 pandemic. Graphical Abstract

Project description:This study was performed to evaluate whether the use of drugs in the treatment of osteoporosis in women is associated with COVID-19 outcomes. The results showed that the risk of hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, and mortality was not altered in individuals taking anti-osteoporosis drugs, suggesting no safety issues during a COVID-19 infection.IntroductionWhether patients with COVID-19 receiving anti-osteoporosis drugs have lower risk of worse outcomes has not been reported yet. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association of anti-osteoporosis drug use with COVID-19 outcomes in women.MethodsData obtained from a nationwide, multicenter, retrospective cohort of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from March 11th to May 30th, 2020 was retrieved from the Turkish Ministry of Health Database. Women 50 years or older with confirmed COVID-19 who were receiving anti-osteoporosis drugs were compared with a 1:1 propensity score-matched COVID-19 positive women who were not receiving these drugs. The primary outcomes were hospitalization, ICU (intensive care unit) admission, and mortality.ResultsA total of 1997 women on anti-osteoporosis drugs and 1997 control patients were analyzed. In the treatment group, 1787 (89.5%) women were receiving bisphosphonates, 197 (9.9%) denosumab, and 17 (0.9%) teriparatide for the last 12 months. Hospitalization and mortality rates were similar between the treatment and control groups. ICU admission rate was lower in the treatment group (23.0% vs 27.0%, p = 0.013). However, multivariate analysis showed that anti-osteoporosis drug use was not an independent associate of any outcome. Hospitalization, ICU admission, and mortality rates were similar among bisphosphonate, denosumab, or teriparatide users.ConclusionResults of this nationwide study showed that preexisting use of anti-osteoporosis drugs in women did not alter the COVID-19-related risk of hospitalization, ICU admission, and mortality. These results do not suggest discontinuation of these drugs during a COVID-19 infection.

Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate the association between recent statin exposure and risk of severe COVID-19 infection and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19 in Denmark.Design and settingObservational cohort study using data from Danish nationwide registries.ParticipantsPatients diagnosed with COVID-19 from 22 February 2020 to 17 May 2020 were followed from date of diagnosis until outcome of interest, death or 17 May 2020.InterventionsUse of statins, defined as a redeemed drug prescription in the 6 months prior to COVID-19 diagnosis.Primary and secondary outcome measuresAll-cause mortality, severe COVID-19 infection and the composite.ResultsThe study population comprised 4842 patients with COVID-19 (median age 54 years (25th-75th percentile, 40-72), 47.1% men), of whom 843 (17.4%) redeemed a prescription of statins. Patients with statin exposure were more often men and had a greater prevalence of comorbidities. The median follow-up was 44 days. After adjustment for age, sex, ethnicity, socioeconomic status and comorbidities, statin exposure was not associated with a significantly different risk of mortality (HR 0.96 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.18); 30-day standardised absolute risk (SAR), 9.8% (8.7% to 11.0%) vs 9.5% (8.2% to 10.8%); SAR difference, -0.4% (-1.9% to 1.2%)), severe COVID-19 infection (HR 1.16 (95% CI 0.95 to 1.41); 30-day SAR, 13.0% (11.8% to 14.2%) vs 14.9% (12.8% to 17.1%); SAR difference, 1.9% (-0.7% to 4.5%)), and the composite outcome of all-cause mortality or severe COVID-19 infection (HR 1.05 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.23); 30-day SAR, 17.6% (16.4% to 18.8%) vs 18.2% (16.4% to 20.1%); SAR difference, 0.6% (-1.6% to 2.9%)). The results were consistent across subgroups of age, sex and presumed indication for statin therapy. Among patients with statin exposure, there was no difference between statin drug or treatment intensity with respect to outcomes.ConclusionsRecent statin exposure in patients with COVID-19 infection was not associated with an increased or decreased risk of all-cause mortality or severe infection.

Project description:BackgroundEvidence for the associations between mental illness and the likelihood of a positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) test result and the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 is scarce. We aimed to investigate these associations with data from a national register in South Korea.MethodsA nationwide cohort study with propensity score matching was done in South Korea using data collected from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service of Korea. We defined mental illness as present if one of the relevant ICD-10 codes was recorded at least twice within 1 year for an outpatient or inpatient. Severe mental illness was considered as non-affective or affective disorders with psychotic features. We included all patients aged older than 20 years who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 through services facilitated by the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service of Korea, and the Ministry of Health and Welfare, South Korea. We investigated the primary outcome (SARS-CoV-2 test positivity) in the entire cohort and the secondary outcomes (severe clinical outcomes of COVID-19: death, admission to the intensive care unit, or invasive ventilation) among those who tested positive.FindingsBetween Jan 1 and May 15, 2020, 216 418 people were tested for SARS-CoV-2, of whom 7160 (3·3%) tested positive. In the entire cohort with propensity score matching, 1391 (3·0%) of 47 058 patients without a mental illness tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, compared with 1383 (2·9%) of 48 058 with a mental illness (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1·00, 95% CI 0·93-1·08). Among the patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, after propensity score matching, 109 (8·3%) of 1320 patients without a mental illness had severe clinical outcomes of COVID-19 compared with 128 (9·7%) of 1320 with a mental illness (adjusted OR 1·27, 95% CI 1·01-1·66).InterpretationDiagnosis of a mental illness was not associated with increased likelihood of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. Patients with a severe mental illness had a slightly higher risk for severe clinical outcomes of COVID-19 than patients without a history of mental illness. Clinicians treating patients with COVID-19 should be aware of the risk associated with pre-existing mental illness.FundingNational Research Foundation of Korea.

Project description:ImportanceEntecavir and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate have comparable efficacy in achieving surrogate end points, including virologic response, and are equally recommended as first-line treatments for patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). However, it is unclear whether treatment with these drugs is associated with equivalent clinical outcomes, especially development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).ObjectiveTo compare entecavir and tenofovir in terms of the risk of HCC and death or liver transplant in patients with CHB infection.Design, setting, and participantsA nationwide historical population cohort study involving treatment-naive adult patients with CHB who started treatment with entecavir (n = 11 464) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (n = 12 692) between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2014, using data from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database. As validation, a hospital cohort of patients with CHB treated with entecavir (n = 1560) or tenofovir (n = 1141) in a tertiary referral center between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2016, were analyzed. Nationwide cohort data were retrieved from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2016, and hospital cohort data from January 1, 2010, to October 31, 2017.Main outcomes and measuresCumulative incidence rates of HCC and death and transplant rates.ResultsAmong the population cohort of 24 156, the mean (SD) age was 48.9 (9.8) years, and 15 120 patients (62.6%) were male. Among the hospital cohort of 2701, the mean (SD) age was 48.8 (10.5) years and 1657 patients (61.3%) were male. In the population cohort, the annual incidence rate of HCC was significantly lower in the tenofovir group (0.64 per 100 person-years [PY]) than in the entecavir group (1.06 per 100 PY). By multivariable-adjusted analysis, tenofovir therapy was associated with a significantly lower risk of HCC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.61; 95% CI, 0.54-0.70) and all-cause mortality or transplant (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.65-0.92) compared with entecavir. The tenofovir group also showed a significantly lower risk of HCC in the 10 923-pair propensity score-matched population cohort (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.54-0.70) and 869-pair propensity score-matched hospital cohort (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.46-0.99) compared with the entecavir group.Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that tenofovir treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk of HCC compared with entecavir treatment in a population-based cohort of adults with CHB; these findings were validated in a hospital cohort. Given the poor prognosis of patients with HCC, these findings may have considerable clinical implications in prevention of this cancer in patients with CHB infection.